Celtic News, not Lazy Journalism

Untenable position for SFA president as drama unfolds

Campbell Ogilvie’s appointment as president of the SFA was always controversial. As general secretary and director of Rangers, Ogilvie was the club’s chief administrator during the final 11-year period they refused to employ Catholic footballers. In many other walks of life, this background would make him an embarrassing relic of a former era, but in Scottish football it was enough to see him promoted to the ultimate honour position.

He remained in position at Rangers long after the new regime of Sir David Murray arrived and set aside the decades-old sectarian employment policy but left the club in 2005, joining Hearts as operations director two months later. All of this puts the SFA president in central position regarding the on-going tax tribunal, which is charged with deciding if Rangers illegally evaded tax from a period starting in 2000 and going on well beyond Ogilvie’s departure.

If the First Tier Tribunal finds against Rangers the SFA must ask for Ogilvie’s immediate resignation. The association cannot have a president embroiled in a tax evasion scam which, even before a verdict has been decided, has already caused untold harm to his former club and the reputation Scottish football. The scale of the damage to public finances has yet to be definitively established but it will not make good reading.

The SFA has just embarked on its first proper investigation into whether directors of a football club, in this instance Rangers, are fit and proper persons to hold such a position. Office holders at the association cannot exercise power over the game if they are not subject to the same standards they demand from clubs. Pending this investigation, and the outcome of the tax tribunal, Ogilvie should temporarily step aside. Scotland is not yet a banana republic, public bodies must have robust ethics and must not allow the shadow of contagion to be cast over the body charged with ensuring legal and moral standards are adhered to.

The SFA has some enormously important months ahead. Its president is currently in a position to influence which course it takes and, if the tribunal verdict falls against Rangers, could be implicated in the scandal which precipitated the crisis. While I am sure Campbell Ogilvie will be shown to have acted with impeccable ethical standards, the SFA must quickly establish a structure clear of contagion.

Leave a Reply

\o/ Stephen with a “ph” KANO 1000 Supports the Green Brigade and is standing up for NEIL LENNON

If you leave aside all you have said after your “not too fussed”
I am fussed because 3rd Party ownership is against FIFA rules and as the SFA/SPL are encompassed within that scope
I want them punished and brutally punished at that. Relegation will do as a start.

Going back to the rest of your post; I want them punished again as brutally as possible for all those allegded acts of wrongdoing, whatever
form that takes. Liquidation and NewCo into SFL 3 for starters

Kinda like two helpings of jelly and ice cream with 100′s and 1000′s

Hail Hail
Stephen with a “ph”

quonno

Tomorrow is Ash Wednesday, traditionally a day for self mortification and acts of penance.
In the current circumstances this could be interpreted as being a jelly and ice cream free day accompanied by a, temporary at least, abstinence from gloating.

Blindlemonchitlin

When lawyers come along to these situations they always remember the maxim that justice must not only be done, it must also be SEEN to be done . When the great and the good from the legal world have been co opted to sort out football’s messes recently, they haven’t done a bad job on the whole.

KJamBhoy

philvisreturns

ernie lynch – Is it not the case though that the cycle of boom and bust is an integral part of capitalism and that there will therefore inevitably be periods when there aren’t enough jobs to go around?

Ernie, there is such a thing as the business cycle but the cycles of boom and bust we’ve seen in the Western world since the 20th century have been largely the product of government control over the money supply creating artificial credit booms which inevitably go bust with ugly consequences.

Also, any graph charting supply and demand tells us that the supply of jobs is dictated by the price of labour. Lower the cost of hiring people and more jobs get created. (thumbsup)

gerryguk7

There’s a good chance the Unions are against the scheme because of the obvious effect it will have on suppressing wage inflation; are they not only protecting the interests of their members?

If I was, God fobid, unlucky enough to be unemployed, I would be very nervous about working in a low paid, unskilled environment for what amounts to far less than what my fellow employees were earning, and thereby preventing them from getting more hours (many workers are on zero hour contracts remember). The potential for resentment is obvious.

Don’t forget many low paid workers also receive Housing Benefit or CT benefit as well. I don’t buy the argument that sainsbury’s, Tesco, couldn’t afford to take these people on as paid members of their workforce. The DWP under the previous government had a scheme which guaranteed funding to employers to take on employees as trainees for 6 months. The Tory government scrapped it. I’m not sure, looking at their alternative, that that decision now seems to make much sense.

BontyBhoy

I’m in favour of that position. I’d heard different. I guess it may depend how you define 3rd party ownership, but, it’s fair to say that we have a much more straightforward view of this in the UK than you will find in a number of other countries. For what it’s worth, I had heard that on the back of the Tevez scenario the FA were re-considering their position to bring them into line with other countries who may be seen to take advantage of 3rd party ownership more easily.
From memory Portugal and Italy were two countries where such ‘arrangements’ were commonplace.

\o/ Hugo Z Hackenbush \o/

Richie, I am more than happy to admit that I was firmly in the “Speculate to accumulate” camp and I am equally happy to admit that, not only was I wrong, but I’m also happy to express my gratitude to PL, Brian Quinn and Dermot Desmond for holding their nerve when the pressure to give in to the support must, at times have been unbearable.

Both these points I readily concede.

However, on the subject of the Steven Fletcher transfer window, I think that the decision over whether to go and get him must have been marginal. In the end, they didn’t and the league was lost and who knows if the outcome would have been different had we signed him, but I think, in hindsight, they might concede that this was an error of judgement.

If we had signed him we MIGHT have won the league that season and it MIGHT have brought Rangers to their current plight a year or two earlier.

That said, I’m not going to let such speculation spoil my enjoyment of the situation they find themselves in.

Neil canamalar Lennon hunskelper extrordinaire

just a wee reminder about lawwell
he’s the man that labelled the Celtic support as bad as the huns by refusing to appeal the UEFA fine, an appeal a first year secondary pupil would have won, ffs.
fair enough on his financial stuff, but then again his bonus is dependent on the financial stuff is it not.

\o/ Stephen with a “ph” KANO 1000 Supports the Green Brigade and is standing up for NEIL LENNON

I know what you mean but looking at previous wrongdoings by RFC (In Administration) the punishments don’t usually fit the crime.
IMHO if they are liquidated and the NEWCO ends up in SFL 3 I will be delighted as the rules are being followed. Not sure what punishment would
apply thereafter. If HMRC saddled NEWCO with the £49million tax liability then I would assume that as punishment but not sure how enforcable
that would be.

In all honesty my ultimate wish is RFC to fold and not reform but that’s unlikely and we all know that.

gerryguk7

“I have no idea if the club were negligent in January 2009 wrt Fletcher, but I know for sure that the information forthcoming from the media was not slanted towards CFC.”

It rarely is! I also agree that it is difficult to identify whether PL or WGS, or somebody else was responsible for the decision not to sign Fletcher. Certainly, at a corporate level, not signing him for the figures quoted around that time now looks like a poor investment decision. Measured criticism of the board can flag that up without slating the signing policy in the round. Certainly since NL took over the signings have been far better, with almost all of them increasing in value and contirbuting to onfield success (fingers crossed) over the course of their time with the club. However, wrt the signing policy generally (buy cheap-ish and young, or develop ourselves, then sell high) PL deserves some praise for implementing it and retaining the disccipline to stick to it, even when certain others were printing money and spending it, burning creditors and ruining their club in the process.

Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo

ernie lynch

‘Ernie, there is such a thing as the business cycle but the cycles of boom and bust we’ve seen in the Western world since the 20th century have been largely the product of government control over the money supply creating artificial credit booms which inevitably go bust with ugly consequences.’

You know perfectly well that’s nonsense.

‘Also, any graph charting supply and demand tells us that the supply of jobs is dictated by the price of labour. Lower the cost of hiring people and more jobs get created.’

That’s a given. The market rights itself. A bit difficult though for us in the UK when capital can source labour from the third world. And obviously impossible when you have a minimum wage. Hence maybe the real reason why people are having to work for no cost to the employer. Though obviously that’s just a state subsidy by any other means and should therefore be anathema to you.

To be honest a part of me would like a completely free market. I suspect most free marketeers wouldn’t be so keen. They know what the consequences would be.

On a micro level I don’t know if you’ve ever had to employ anyone. If you have you’ll know that the last thing any employer wants is a workforce that’s there on sufferance. The logic of cracking down on the workshy in the middle of a recession escapes me.

\o/ Stephen with a “ph” KANO 1000 Supports the Green Brigade and is standing up for NEIL LENNON

googybhoy ♥ Celtic and Integrity

Rangers interest from rugby club millionaire Brian Kennedy
The owner of Sale Sharks rugby club has become the latest business figure to express interest in buying Rangers.
Multi-millionaire home improvement entrepreneur Brian Kennedy has indicated his “tentative interest” in acquiring the Ibrox club.
Rangers went into administration with HMRC pursuing an unpaid £9m tax bill accrued since May 2011.
Sources close to Mr Kennedy said he was just one of hundreds of people who were looking at Rangers.

Rugby is the way forward for Rangers.
Kennedy born in Edinburgh is a Jehovah’s Witness

dirtymac \o/

I’m in favour of that position. I’d heard different. I guess it may depend how you define 3rd party ownership, but, it’s fair to say that we have a much more straightforward view of this in the UK than you will find in a number of other countries. For what it’s worth, I had heard that on the back of the Tevez scenario the FA were re-considering their position to bring them into line with other countries who may be seen to take advantage of 3rd party ownership more easily.
From memory Portugal and Italy were two countries where such ‘arrangements’ were commonplace.
+++++

The FA are very much against TP-ownership of players and are/were one of the key players in applying pressure on Uefa to end their usage, citing the instability they provide re asset value retention and external pressure to sell (Neymar has 5% of him permanently ‘owned’ by one company entitling them to a cut of all transfers in his career – can you imagine the pressure such investors apply on players to move?).

Rieperman

Headtheball

I agree that Ogilvie should step aside until the big tax case has concluded and then take it from there.
I also suggest that Peter Lawwell should become acting president as he has lots of football experience although, to be fair, most of that is restricted to this universe.

Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon

If EBTs are part of a contractual payment they are fine – under this rule at least. HMRC will take a different view!

If they are not contractual payments then they break this rule.

And if the players had a second contract, or a letter that effectively amends their original contract, that breaks the other rule I quoted unless the SPL was given copies – and I can’t see that having happened.

gerryguk7

“The logic of cracking down on the workshy in the middle of a recession escapes me.”

Cracking post. If the purpose of this policy is to get people into long term, meaningful work (it isn’t, it’s to provide a sop to Daily Mail readers and a supply of cheap labour to big industry) then it will not work for the reasons you ouline. People aren’t working mainly because there’s nae jobs. Punishing/humiliating them further for that is somewhere between pointless and disgraceful.

philvisreturns

That’s a given. The market rights itself. A bit difficult though for us in the UK when capital can source labour from the third world. And obviously impossible when you have a minimum wage.

So the obvious solution would be to restrict immigration and abolish the minimum wage. Also make labour less expensive to hire through other policies.

Hence maybe the real reason why people are having to work for no cost to the employer. Though obviously that’s just a state subsidy by any other means and should therefore be anathema to you.

If anything, it’s a subsidy that goes the other way. Don’t underestimate the time, money, and hassle companies have to go through to take on these workfare folk. No wonder some of them aren’t keen.

To be honest a part of me would like a completely free market. I suspect most free marketeers wouldn’t be so keen. They know what the consequences would be.

Cats and dogs living together, anarchy, etc.

On a micro level I don’t know if you’ve ever had to employ anyone. If you have you’ll know that the last thing any employer wants is a workforce that’s there on sufferance. The logic of cracking down on the workshy in the middle of a recession escapes me.

Probably something to do with the fact that we’re broke and having a large, growing, underclass of permanently unemployed people is expensive. (thumbsup)

Mort *****

Anyone with an account for there like to clarify things for them. It’s really quite simple.

The Celtic Football and Athletic Company Limited was incorporated as a company in 1897. In 1994 following the floation on the stock exchange, the company changed its name to Celtic Plc.

To protect the history of the existing brand and to ensure that no one else could register the old name as a trademark or use it in anyway, the custodians bought a company “off the shelf” in 1994 and renamed it “The Celtic Football and Athletic Company”. This current comany only exists on paper.

It will be funny to see if the ring the phone ins about it only to get their grand theorys sent up in smoke.

Can’t blame them for trying but the sheer stupidity of them baffles me.

Mort

Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo

Neil canamalar Lennon hunskelper extrordinaire

gerryg…,
its a distraction from chasing people like philvis for their tax, if this mob focussed on tax evasion rather than reduce the resources of the corporate tax investigation team, all the national debt would be paid off in a couple of years. But that doesnt suit them, the corporate lobby has generous benefits, innit

Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon

Cait Reilly is a geology graduate currently volunteering in a museum – an activity that will enhance her chances of a job in the field she is trained in. How would giving this up for the “opportunity” to be “trained” in stacking shelves improve her chances of a job?

If she doesn’t do it she has no income. Nil. Nada. I don’t count that as a choice and the workfare post is therefore forced.

And what does the government call this scheme? Mandatory Work Activity. I’m sure someone with your education knows exactly what the first word means.

Monaghan1900

“Your rambling email to me makes it very obvious that you did not check your facts before writing nor did you give me the benefit of the doubt. This is very disappointing, but frankly typical of the sort of ill informed drivel I have to read all the time.”

gerryguk7

Well, the stated aim of the policy is to get more prople into work. We’ll wait and see how many more people are unemployed the next time the figures are released and see just how much of a success it was. I maintain the policy is populist nonsense window dressing designed to appease the rabid knee jerk right, at the expense of thousands of people’s dignity and sense of self worth.

dirtymac \o/

If EBTs are part of a contractual payment they are fine – under this rule at least. HMRC will take a different view!

If they are not contractual payments then they break this rule.

And if the players had a second contract, or a letter that effectively amends their original contract, that breaks the other rule I quoted unless the SPL was given copies – and I can’t see that having happened.
+++++

Yeah, that’s why it’s the olde silver bullet – they’re friar tucked by HMRC on one hand or by the SPL on the other.

hen1rik

leftclicktic

mearns 2 milton
Cant remember where i read it over the past few weeks there has been a lot going on, but i read we still have the same league reistration number from 1888 till present day.
clutching at straws again, do they never tire but then again desperate men do etc etc.
HAIL HAIL

The Lizard King

There are many balls in the air, and don’t interrupt your enemy..etc etc

The Ogilvie angle is right to raise, but why today?

H

TLK
———————————————————

Paul67

Ok so hadn’t seen the SFA “Independent” investigation when I posted. Possibly I can see that he should stand aside as the Inquiry is live – albeit we have no idea the scope of this. There is a risk the focus is on immediate Whyte-isms, not the more systemic Murrayness of the last 20 odd years.

I don’t see any investigation into Murrayness until FTT reports. Consequently, Ogilvie is one of many rocks we dust down and throw after the big reveal, along with the other quarry-full.